The Promise Of Marriage If Any Was After The First Physical Intercourse: Supreme Court Quashes Rape Case
The Supreme Court allowed an appeal to quash criminal proceedings against a man accused of rape and cheating based on an alleged false promise of marriage.
The Supreme Court quashed criminal proceedings against a man accused of rape under the inducement of the promise of marriage.
The Court remarked that in both the alleged instances of rape, the victim stated that she was mentally upset, but that did not caution her from again accompanying the accused to hotel rooms.
A Bench of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice K Vinod Chandran held, “On reading the victim’s statements to the police, including the First Information Statement and the later recorded statement, we are not convinced that the sexual relationship was without her consent. The victim also categorically stated that after the first and second incidents, she was mentally upset, yet she still accompanied the accused to hotel rooms again.”
AOR P. Soma Sundaram represented the Appellant, while Senior AAG Amit Anand Tiwari appeared for the Respondent.
Brief Facts
The victim had alleged that at the request of the Appellant, she accompanied him to a movie after which, she felt dizzy and they took a room in a hotel where according to the victim, there was an ‘abrupt and unexpected’ sexual intercourse, under coercion against her wish. She alleged that despite protesting and crying out, the Appellant continued the act, after which she told him that he had ruined her life.
It was at this juncture, that the victim alleged that a promise was made by the Appellant, putting his hand on her head, that he would marry her.
The Madras High Court had earlier dismissed the Appellant’s Petition under Section 482 of the CrPC, stating that the matter should proceed to trial to determine whether fraudulent inducement occurred.
Court’s Reasoning
The Supreme Court remarked, “We have already found that there is no promise of marriage to coerce consent from the victim for sexual intercourse; as forthcoming from the statements made by the victim. The promise if any was after the first physical intercourse and even later the allegation was forceful intercourse without any consent. In all the three instances it was the allegation that, the intercourse was on threat and coercion and there is no consent spoken of by the victim, in which case there cannot be any inducement found, on a promise held out. The allegation of forceful intercourse on threat and coercion is also not believable, given the relationship admitted between the parties and the willing and repeated excursions to hotel rooms.”
“It is also the categoric statement of the victim that after both instances, the victim was mentally upset, but this did not prevent her from still again going to the very same hotel at the request of the accused a third time. The story was repeated, of the talk of marriage having been kept aside till the sexual intercourse had been carried out, again forcefully. There is also an allegation of threat and coercion before they had a physical relationship,” the Bench noted.
“The allegation is also of threat and coercion against the victim, to have sexual intercourse with the accused, which even as per the victim’s statement was repeated thrice in the same manner, when she willingly accompanied the accused to a hotel room,” the Bench further remarked.
Consequently, the Court held, “Having heard both sides in this case, we have absolutely no doubt in our mind that the criminal proceedings initiated against the present appellant are nothing but an abuse of process of the court. This is precisely a case where the High Court should have interfered in exercise of its inherent and extraordinary powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.”
Accordingly, the Supreme Court allowed the Appeal.
Cause Title: Jothiragawan v. State & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 386)
Appearance:
Appellant: AOR P. Soma Sundaram; Advocates Y. Arunagiri and M.p. Parthiban
Respondent: Senior AAG Amit Anand Tiwari; AOR Sabarish Subramanian and Vairawan A.S; Advocates Jaswanthi.A and Subash
